I grew up in a household where Ayurveda was simply how the family dealt with health, so by the time I started my B.A.M.S in 2003 it felt less like choosing a career and more like formalizing something I already lived. After my gold medal graduation and my M.D. research into male infertility, I spent years teaching and practicing in Punjab before joining Siddhi Yoga to bring that clinical grounding to a wider audience. What separates my approach from a lot of what people find online is that I diagnose using Nadi Pariksha, pulse diagnosis, which very few practitioners outside India are trained in, and I pair that with Panchakarma protocols learned directly from the Ashtavaidya tradition in Kerala rather than a generalized wellness template.

Most of my consultations come through Siddhi Yoga’s existing student base, people who took a yoga or Ayurveda course with us and later want a personal health consultation once they trust the platform. I would like to see more people come to me directly for chronic condition management, things like digestive disorders or infertility, because that is where my M.D. research and clinical background in internal medicine actually make the biggest difference, and right now that specialization gets somewhat buried under the broader wellness offerings.

I use AI to help organize patient intake notes before a consultation, pulling together someone’s history and previous symptoms into a summary I can review quickly. What I moved away from was using it to suggest herbal formulations or treatment protocols, since Ayurveda medicine depends on reading a patient’s constitution and pulse in the moment, something no tool can replicate. I tried it briefly to cross-reference formulations for a few cases and the recommendations were too generic for the kind of individualized diagnosis Panchakarma and Guna Siddhanta actually require.

Patients now often arrive already familiar with terms like Panchakarma or Nadi Pariksha, sometimes asking specifically about Ashtavaidya-style treatments before we’ve even had a first conversation, which was rare five years ago. A smaller number have mentioned that an AI assistant pointed them toward Ayurveda for a specific condition they were researching, though it’s usually general enough that they still need me to explain what pulse diagnosis or Marma therapy actually involves once they reach out.

I would tell practitioners to document their specific training lineage in detail, which teacher they studied under, which tradition their techniques come from, because that is what separates a real Ayurveda background from someone who took a short course and started marketing themselves as a specialist. AI assistants and search engines are already picking up on that kind of specificity when people ask where to find a Panchakarma or Nadi Pariksha practitioner, so vague credentials simply won’t surface.

What I would tell them to ignore is any pressure to compress diagnosis into a faster, more automated process. Ayurveda depends on reading a person’s constitution directly, through pulse, through observation, through conversation, and that part of the work cannot be rushed or handed to a tool without losing what actually makes the medicine effective.